I can see why they agreed to pay.

Foxcon legal department assessed the cost of litigation to fight against bogus patents potentially higher than just pay those damn mafioso.

Also the behavior of the US justice in Apple vs Samsung may have told them that the mafioso business of extortion through patents is somewhat tolerated in this country. Well not much different finally than doing business in China, but at least in China the extortion by the members of the army or the Central Committee is not hiding behind patent laws and China never pretended to be a free market.

> WTF is a "feed-in tarif"?
In Europe that's a guaranteed purchase price by the utilities for home producers of "green" energy. You can also call that a subsidy. Now If you really believe that when WE Energy buy your PV electricity at $.25 per kWh they will be able to recoup these costs by selling it at a premium, this is were you enter the delusional category.

FYI WE Energy do have an offer at 100% renewable energy[1]: with a rate of $.14 (0.12611+0.01388 [2]) ! So basically all their customers are subsiding the purchase price of PVs, and the taxpayers subsidizing your installation. And you have the balls to tell me that I'm the one working from inaccurate or obsolete information ...

Also, if you did this installation recently, double-check your contract I am not sure that this scam will go for long, even in Germany the government is starting to see the stupidity of all this and is reducing the feed-in tariff.

[1] http://www.we-energies.com/business/wisconsin_service_rates/eft_smbus.htm
[2] http://www.we-energies.com/business/elec/std_rateplan.htm

Your installation cost for a residential system is extremely cheap ! On average in the USA a 3kW system would be a $17000 investment [1]. Also your annual savings are quite incredible: with the average household cost of electricity in the USA at 11.72c per kWh [2], it would mean that your system produced around 13413 kWh [12x(163-32)/0.1172] over a year ! For a 3kW system this would mean that your magic installation as a capacity factor of 51% !!!! [13413/ (3 x 24 x 365)].

So yes, I don't know if you're delusional but you have been most likely lying by forgetting to speak about the subsidies you received for the installation and feed-in tarif. Oh and if you want to prove your case, please state your location and the supplier of your system...

What is far more annoying than your convenient omission of subsidies is all the idiots solar fanboys moderating you informative when they have absolutely no clue about the real cost of Solar PV energy....

[1] http://www.irena.org/DocumentDownloads/Publications/RE_Technologies_Cost_Analysis-SOLAR_PV.pdf
[2] http://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.cfm?t=epmt_5_03

This is quite incredible that people continue to tout Solar PV as an economically viable energy when it is completely ineffective most of the time. And when the sun does not shines, one still need the energy from the Local Distribution Company. Saying that Solar PV is at the retail cost of grid power is either a lie or a complete delusion.

This is well known and no sane people uses NTLM auth anymore, even Microsoft recommend to deactivate this authentication method. The idiots at Microsoft used a DES ECB implementation instead of CBC that anyone with two ounce of crypto knowledge would choose. The practical impact of this very bad design choice is that a 14 character password has as much complexity as two independant 7 characters passwords ! So when the authors brag about cracking a 14 character password in 6 minutes, what they're really doing is cracking two 7 character passwords in 6 minutes, this is entirely different and not impressive at all.

I doubt a court has already given a verdict. An element of proof like DNA (even if it is a very strong one when properly retrieved) is not enough. A tribunal has to review these elements first to exclude errors.

Yeah, so suddenly the guys who did a lot of work to be undetected will use Metasploit code and disclose their owning of the computers with an AC/DC song .... Methinks someone is not reaching his objectives and found a good scapegoat as an excuse... The alternative of course would be that script kiddies are owning Iran's nuclear researchs lab infrastructure ...

Big misunderstanding about Quantum Physics: It is not because our interpretation of quantum states is probabilistic that quantum physics are NOT deterministic. There may perfectly well be a deterministic behavior of quantum physics, it's just that so far we can only describe is with non-deterministic mathematics. See the Copenhagen Interpretation

Contact me, my company has a subsidiary in Beijin and is looking for skilled developpers but with good english skills.

Even if we take at face value your Greenpeace studies, these subsidies are ridiculous compared to those of solar energy. 200G € sound like a lot, but in 2010, nuclear accounted for 22.5% of electric power while solar only 4%. Now the subsidies for solar amounted to more than 50G € in ten years and the comitments for the lifetime of these obsolete and inneficient solar pannels are more than 50G €. Of course if you had been honest you could have compared the ratio of subsidies per kWh which (according the Greenpeace study) is averaged at 4.3c for nuclear, compared with the actual 25c of solar which was a wopping 50c in the early 2000. We could also speak about the utter failure of this solar subsidies to reduce CO2 emissions and spur innovation. Germany as failed producing cost effective solar pannels and is now importing from China. Add to that the intrinsec unreliability of solar power which to be accounted for would need tremendous investments in storage and grid infrastructure.

From TFA: "Ships in the USS Miami's class cost about $900 million at the time to build. The newest attack submarines, the Virginia class, cost about $2.6 billion apiece." So yes I would be amazed if this vessel returns to service, but I would also if it is replaced with a new one...

You're absolutely right, Although if this nth study could stop the nonsense about the health danger of these scanners why not ? Of course this do not answer the real question of the cost/benefit ratio of these devices in the first place, but at least it will stop idiots using pseudo-science and fear mongering to fight them and have a rationale debate over the costs of airport security.